modernization
While frequent part repairs and
replacements are never the best methods to
combat ongoing obsolescence issues, a onetime
part replacement for a problematic
component could greatly extend the
lifespan of a test system. When considering
a simple COTS swap, a good systems
integrator will always consider the
potential cyber security vulnerabilities
when a test system is connected to
a network.
For example, Security Technical
Implementation Guide (STIG) compliance is
always at the forefront of a G Systems
Engineer’s mind to ensure enhanced cyber
security for software and hardware to
reduce vulnerabilities when COTS parts
are utilized.
But not all obsolescence issues can be
fixed by swapping out a part or two.
Sometimes, a more extensive technology
insertion approach is needed. For example,
on a separate system used in the VSIF lab,
Lockheed Martin needed to migrate from
an outdated hardware platform to a
modern, modular COTS platform, replace
the previous server hardware with new
server hardware, and upgrade the
development software and Windows
server OS.
As with most critical aerospace and
defense test systems, extended downtime
for this type of extensive upgrade was not
an option. Thus, prior to installation of the
new hardware, G Systems engineers
simulated inputs to the modular COTS
hardware in their lab and accomplished
the upgrade while the system was still in
70 SHOWCASE 2019 \\ AEROSPACETESTINGINTERNATIONAL.COM
use. Additionally, because the system was
designed using a distributed system
approach, G Systems could further
minimize downtime by performing the
upgrade in phases so that some systems
were always running.
TECHNOLOGY INSERTION
When performing technology insertion, it
is important to consider the impact
replacing a part or two, or more, will have
on the entire system. First, you need to be
sure the entire software stack will remain
stable if parts are swapped. Additionally,
you need to think about the fact that some
newer hardware may only work with
newer software drivers, and sometimes
those newer software drivers may not be
supported on an older OS.
With technology insertion, you should
also plan to execute regression testing to
ensure the software application still
functions the same with the new hardware
and no new issues were introduced. For
example, when a G Systems’ customer
found that its Data Acquisition (DAQ)
chassis was not compatible with their new
OS, their engineers performed regression
testing to verify that the 40 expensive
existing DAQ cards would still function
with the new chassis.
Also, since any system upgrade possess
some level of risk, if there are components
that are functioning reliably, it is typically
best to leave those parts untouched, even if
you are upgrading other components. In
short, it is best to manage risk by only
upgrading components as necessary and
not just changing out parts because they
are ‘old’.
TECHNOLOGY REFRESH
Not all systems can, or should, be saved.
There will be instances when it will be
more cost and time effective to perform a
full technology refresh on your system
instead. However, just the phrase
‘technology refresh’ can scare some
companies since taking this approach
theoretically means all parts will be
replaced. But, with a technology refresh,
you can be sure you modernize critical
aspects of the system, reduce downtime
and compatibility issues, and that your
system is fully supported.
To make a technology refresh more
manageable, and ultimately eliminate the
need for a full upgrade in the future, it is
important to develop a phased approach.
This requires a design that is modular
to accommodate future growth and
driver updates, upgrading the software
from unsupported software to new
supported and more secure versions and
modernizing existing hardware to expand
capabilities with better data acquisition
and test components.
THE NEED FOR MODERNIZATION
Organizations often only start thinking
about aging systems and obsolescence
when issues such as machinery
breakdowns or software security problems
start to occur. If this is the first time your
organization is thinking about how to
handle future breakdowns and the
possibilities of component obsolescence,
you may want to create a definitive plan to
incorporate preventive action measure
rather than waiting until a detrimental
corrective action is necessary. In most
cases, deferred maintenance has proven to
be more costly than modernizing a system.
Eventually the time will come when a
system update or migration project is
necessary, in which case it is imperative
to glean experience from a system
integration company with specific
modernization experience.
By taking a proactive approach from day
one of developing your system to
understand how all the system components
function together, you can determine the
best approach to make meaningful changes
and upgrades to get more life out of your
system when the time comes. Additionally,
an experienced third party, such as
G Systems, can partner with you to design
and build the best solution with system
aging and obsolescence at the forefront. \\
Dave Baker, senior vice president of engineering and
manufacturing at G Systems
3 // User-configurable
software interface for the
F-35 VSIF Data Acquisition
System
4 // An example of a
system undergoing a
one-off part replacement to
cost-effectively extend the
system’s lifespan
“it is important to consider the
impact replacing a part or two, or
more, will have on the entire system”
4
3
/AEROSPACETESTINGINTERNATIONAL.COM